Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 0

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

EFL teachers’ perceptions of teacherpreneurs’ persuasive techniques on Instagram

Naqdi Babaee, Neda, Shamsaee, Saeedeh, Shams, Mohammad Ali·2026·Discover Psychology
DOI 10.1007/s44202-026-00899-x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s44202-026-00899-x

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 14

  1. Alfahadi A. The role of social media sites in the enhancement of English language learning at the University of Tabuk. Int J English Educ. 2017;6(3):105–13.
  2. Alzeebaree Y, Hasan IA. What makes an effective EFL teacher: high school students’ perceptions. Asian ESP J. 2020;16(2):169–83.
  3. Berry B, Byrd A, Wieder A. Teacherpreneurs: innovative teachers who lead but don’t leave. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 2013.
  4. Buckley AP, Futonge K. Teacherpreneurs: From vocation to innovation. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on innovation and entrepreneurship (ICIE 2016). Ryerson University, Toronto, Canada. 2016.
  5. Cialdini RB. Influence: the psychology of persuasion. Collins; 2006.
  6. Cialdini RB. Influence: the psychology of persuasion. Rev. ed. HarperCollins; 2009.
  7. Dörnyei Z. Research methods in applied linguistics: quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methodologies. Oxford University Press; 2007.
  8. Forozandehfar L, Manoochehrzadeh M. EFL teachers’ conception and choice of assessment tasks: The focus of age, gender and level of teaching. J New Trends English Language Learn. 2024;3(5):83–106.
  9. Fourkan M, Mohammadi M. Beyond credibility: expressive authenticity judgments of online reviews. J Bus Res. 2025;189:115–30.
  10. Ghajarieh A, Sardabi N, Mirhosseinian N. Professional identity and practice of Iranian EFL teacherpreneurs in virtual affinity spaces: a qualitative study. J Foreign Language Teach Trans Stud. 2023;8(3):85–110.
  11. Hovland CI, Janis IL, Kelley HH. Communication and persuasion: psychological studies of opinion change. Yale University Press; 1953.
  12. Jayawardena NS. The e-learning persuasion through gamification: an elaboration likelihood model perspective. Int J Educ Manag. 2021;35(4):839–56.
  13. Shelton C, Archambault L. Discovering how teachers build virtual relationships and develop as professionals through online teacherpreneurship. J Interact Learn Res. 2018;29(4):579–602.
  14. Yeleussov A. Understanding online teacherpreneurship through the prism of sellers’ and buyers’ experience on Teacherslab.kz (Unpublished master’s thesis). Graduate School of Education, Nazarbayev University, Nur-Sultan, Kazakhstan. 2022.

Metadata

Authors
Naqdi Babaee, N., Shamsaee, S., & Shams, M. A.
Venue
Discover Psychology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2026-09-21
Volume
6
Issue
1
ISSN
2731-4537
DOI
10.1007/s44202-026-00899-x
Cited by
0
References
28
Language
en
Licence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.